Google Cloud Speech-to-Text API (Chirp) + Gemini 2.5 Flash Non-Thinking. Treat it as a searchable index of what was broadcast, not a quotation record.
00:00:00he marches and considers and
00:00:03takes a stand. Let's hear your point on the issue of blocking if you have a point to make.
00:00:07Look, we have a temporal and tactical
00:00:10priority, and we have a strategic
00:00:12priority. At the strategic
00:00:15level, what is important to us in this
00:00:19war equation at the moment is that
00:00:21we can and are fighting for it, and
00:00:25our most important leverage is to
00:00:28stabilize these Iranian arrangements in the Persian Gulf
00:00:31and have them accepted.
00:00:35In this path, you
00:00:38have a series of tactical and temporal priorities as well. You say, "Shouldn't we
00:00:42have gone to the Oman meeting and participated? We should
00:00:46have waited for another time for this to
00:00:50happen." But the reality is that sometimes
00:00:53you have to, after all, because of those strategic goals, your
00:00:57strategic priorities. Yes, in some cases, you
00:01:00shouldn't do something, but because of your strategic prioritization and
00:01:04because of those strategic considerations, you have to do it. Besides,
00:01:08if we take this as a measure that we shouldn't have done this
00:01:11at this time, why? Because the pressure on America
00:01:15is gradually decreasing. Well, why are the Americans against this? That is, why
00:01:19are the Americans opposing this, and behind the scenes, they
00:01:22are making great efforts to disrupt this? Besides,
00:01:26the Iranian decision-maker, I think,
00:01:30at the same time as he is
00:01:34entering a meeting regarding the Strait of Hormuz, which was canceled,
00:01:37and he is negotiating, and
00:01:41within the framework of those bilateral
00:01:44or regional arrangements, as I mentioned to you, the Americans say,
00:01:48"We must have a serious role in this doubt." Iran says, "No, I do not accept your role.
00:01:52These arrangements must be either bilateral between me and Iran and
00:01:56Oman, or finally between me and the countries of the region," which
00:02:00was also within this framework that he wanted to
00:02:03enter that meeting. Besides, the Iranian decision-maker,
00:02:06in addition
00:02:08to advancing these negotiations,
00:02:12anyway, in the framework of the resistance
00:02:15front, the issue of Yemen also becomes active, and
00:02:19that also had its effect, which was a serious and important effect, in my opinion.
00:02:23That is, it was an important card that
00:02:25took shape in this current
00:02:29war game. That is, events that occurred in Yemen occurred in Bab el-Mandeb,
00:02:32occurred in the incident of, after all, hitting
00:02:36that east-west pipeline of
00:02:40Saudi Arabia, and today also a center
00:02:43and another one. This does not mean
00:02:46that Iran or the resistance front
00:02:49has retreated or that it has ignored temporal priority.
00:02:53No, on the other side, at the same time as we are trying
00:02:57to stabilize our arrangements in the Persian Gulf. But
00:03:00tension is also increasing there, which is also,
00:03:04in my opinion, based on the assessments and analyses
00:03:07that the decision-maker has
00:03:11regarding the fact that
00:03:14the Americans probably decided to increase
00:03:17tension, just as we have seen its signs in the past few
00:03:21days, both the position that Netanyahu had and the position that Trump had, and also that
00:03:25resolution of the Board of Governors referring Iran's file to the Security Council. All
00:03:29of these were signs of a situation of escalating tension, and
00:03:33I think the events that occurred in Yemen regarding the
00:03:37Saudi pipeline may
00:03:40have affected their calculations,
00:03:43but regarding that issue, I think
00:03:46that the Americans
00:03:50were not happy with what happened regarding, that is, what was supposed to happen
00:03:54regarding the Strait of Hormuz, and for this reason, they tried
00:03:57to prevent it from happening. Why? Because at a macro
00:04:01and strategic level and in the long run, this is definitely
00:04:04against America's security, political, and economic interests in the region.
00:04:08Clause five of the agreement, you might
00:04:11say, it's an entry.
00:04:14I'm not waiting for a checkpoint anymore. Clause five of the agreement
00:04:18may have a vote. By signing this memorandum of understanding, the late
00:04:21agreement, the late Islam, by signing a memorandum of understanding, the Islamic Republic of Iran
00:04:25will make arrangements with its maximum effort for commercial ships without
00:04:29cost, only for 60% from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman
00:04:32and vice versa. The movement of commercial ships will start immediately, and
00:04:36considering the need to remove technical and military
00:04:39obstacles and demining by the Islamic Republic of Iran, it will be established
00:04:43within 30 days. Now, from here
00:04:46on, we have work to do. The Islamic Republic of Iran will discuss
00:04:50with the Sultanate of Oman to determine the future administration
00:04:54and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz in accordance with applicable
00:04:56international law and the sovereign rights of the coastal states of the Strait of Hormuz.
00:05:00It will also exchange views with other
00:05:03coastal states of the Persian Gulf. One
00:05:07narrative, one assumption, is that what is happening
00:05:10is that the Oman meeting
00:05:14was a continuation of the implementation of a memorandum of understanding
00:05:17that at least now one side says
00:05:20is dead. At least one side, which is the American
00:05:23side, says it's dead.
00:05:26And in such a state,
00:05:29for us to say, "Well, let other countries also come and talk to each other," I only
00:05:33understand this from it. Otherwise, the officials of the Islamic Republic, if
00:05:37even the officials of the Islamic Republic are not there, anyone else who knows
00:05:41geography will say that the Strait of Hormuz is a waterway between two countries, Iran and Oman.
00:05:44It's very clear. Therefore, who should decide about it? Iran
00:05:48and Oman. Just like about the Suez Canal, which is a natural
00:05:52waterway, that is a man-made waterway, but it doesn't matter. It
00:05:55passes through the geography of Egypt. Now, no one argues that it reaches
00:05:58Greece at the top, and at the bottom, it goes to
00:06:02Saudi Arabia and Sudan. What do you have to do with them?
00:06:06Suez Egypt, and here Iran and Oman, and Iran has said this
00:06:10200 times. Now, if we say that we have security arrangements
00:06:13with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait,
00:06:15Bahrain, Iraq, and, let me tell you,
00:06:19Qatar, and all of them, should they give their opinion about it? Why should we even ask
00:06:22for their opinion? It's a question. Maybe there's a logical reason, I don't know. I really
00:06:26put my ignorance under my feet, and my head reaches the sun, but I don't know. I don't
00:06:30know. This is also one of them.
00:06:33Why should we ask for Saudi Arabia's opinion? Why should I ask
00:06:37Kuwait's opinion on how I should manage the Strait of Hormuz? This is one
00:06:40point. The second point is
00:06:43that, you see, the assumption is that this meeting that was supposed to be held
00:06:47was going to, you are assuming Veda was going
00:06:50to come and give Kuwait's and Saudi Arabia's opinion on, for example, the waterway.
00:06:53If
00:06:56it wasn't supposed to, then this is your point. Now, what is the reason for this?
00:06:59The reason for this is that the agreement that
00:07:02was made between Iran and Oman, which is
00:07:06currently in place but has not
00:07:07yet been announced,
00:07:10its provisions
00:07:15should be communicated to these
00:07:18countries, as countries that are, after all, concerned
00:07:21about this issue. For example, they
00:07:24should legitimize this agreement.
00:07:28This is one point. The second point is that,
00:07:31you see, one side of this issue is us, and the other
00:07:35side is Oman. The Omanis, who have
00:07:39so far, two or three times, regarding the agreement,
00:07:45one of those who wants these countries in the region
00:07:48to have at least a minimal role in these arrangements
00:07:52is not as
00:07:55a guarantor, not as someone who wants their opinion to be heard, but as
00:07:58someone who can give
00:08:01Oman the courage to sign this agreement.
00:08:04After all, Oman has so far, two or three times, under American
00:08:08and Trump's threats, and because of the sabotage of actors like Imam. At least
00:08:15its advantage is that Oman gains
00:08:19more courage to sign this agreement. But
00:08:23it is not supposed that their considerations
00:08:26will be included in the text of the agreement, and they have not been.
00:08:29Saudi Arabia was one of the opponents of this meeting.
00:08:32So I think here, the further it goes, the worse
00:08:35it gets.
00:08:36Look,
00:08:40Islam has tied our hands.
00:08:57It's true in its own way. We said before, "Sir, the arrangements of this region
00:09:01are not going to change their geography in 500 years.
00:09:05They are the same." They are the same. So we
00:09:08should think for ourselves. This is very clear. And we,
00:09:12whatever we are, whoever we are, let's talk to Iran. No, we
00:09:16have no problem talking to any of our neighbors. No, we have no problem talking to Oman.
00:09:20What does it mean to sit and talk to Iran about this, for example, waterway corridor? That not
00:09:23only has no problem, but you should also talk to others.
00:09:26Then you don't say, "Sir, this is clause 5." Why are
00:09:30you blind to clause 5?
00:09:33I say, above it, when there is no agreement,
00:09:36that consultation, exchange of views, they had put
00:09:40it there. Now that it's not there, it's consultation. Now something.
00:09:57Were we supposed to sit and talk about security arrangements there, or did Oman say, "Haji, I'm scared, let's go together two or three
00:10:01times to this, for example, dark warehouse that has no light. You be there too so I won't be scared."
00:10:04I said, "Okay, you come too." This wasn't it. Which one is it after all? This is something
00:10:08that we understand. These two are a bit mixed up. Not in His Holiness's statement.
00:10:12Or generally, from places where people talk, officials,
00:10:16well, let's not say where, officials in some places, in some planets,
00:10:19for example, people talk, there they don't understand what was supposed to be talked about.
00:10:22Here, I'm completely Axios and
00:10:36I say that a security agreement, which is a strategic issue, has two possibilities. Either it was
00:10:40supposed to be concluded here now, and America would receive
00:10:43a strategic slap in the face. It's not a problem. The oil price
00:10:47and other indicators will drop by $5, but it will have a serious effect. We
00:10:51had thought so. This is serious. Look, you sometimes said in issues
00:10:55that we seriously thought the other side would do such and such, and then we saw
00:10:59that decisions were made based on this. Now we have to ask
00:11:02again. After all these serious events, we thought that in the
00:11:06Oman meeting, regional security arrangements would be concluded.
00:11:09No, nothing was said. Now, if this
00:11:12is not the case, let me present a simple process.
00:11:16Security arrangements that we should talk about are very
00:11:19complex, very
00:11:23complex. Firstly, it starts
00:11:26with informal security channels.
00:11:30Secondly, it starts bilaterally, then it reaches
00:11:33public diplomatic channels, bilaterally, and finally it comes
00:11:37here. A simple reason for this, besides all this, is that
00:11:41Qatar has a dispute with the UAE.
00:11:44The UAE has a dispute with Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia has a dispute with Kuwait.
00:11:48Kuwait has a dispute with Iraq. They have the least dispute with us.
00:11:51It's really like this, that among them, Iran should be the mediator. That is,
00:11:55Iran should say, "I will participate in Oman, and I will reconcile you." That would be more natural. But
00:11:58they all agree on us. No, it's not like that. Among
00:12:02themselves, regarding, in this war, I want to say, their position towards
00:12:06is not the same. Can we say that in a spectrum,
00:12:09yes, they all fall on that side? Of course,
00:12:13all of them, for example, Iraq was also supposed to be here. No, Iraq doesn't fall on that side.
00:12:17And for example, Oman itself, we can't say
00:12:20it's completely on that side. They understand this, but they have differences
00:12:24with each other. A regional arrangement has been a strategic issue,
00:12:27so let's overlook tactical issues. In my opinion, in war,
00:12:31when you reach 10 kilometers from Khorramshahr,
00:12:35Mr. Akbar Khani is really an expert, and the details of the history
00:12:38of the war are in his grasp.
00:12:41Operation Beit-ol-Moqaddas, which
00:12:44had three phases, two phases of which were successful, and the third phase was the liberation of Khorramshahr,
00:12:48and it wasn't. Is that right, Mr. Akbar Khani? That is, it was May,
00:12:52and it was almost over, and they hadn't reached Khorramshahr yet. They said, "Now, this is tactical."
00:12:55You had gone all this way to liberate Khorramshahr, and if you hadn't,
00:12:59everyone would have said that the operation was not successful, although it was a very successful operation, and in the first two phases,
00:13:03we had taken prisoners and hit the combat organization. So,
00:13:06a tactical issue has a strategic effect in many places. Now, in this situation,
00:13:10giving a signal of weakness, which, by the way, is not a signal of weakness, I emphasize
00:13:14this, I'm speaking generally. Giving a signal of weakness is a kind of signal that Trump
00:13:18writes. They are looking for a deal.
00:13:21He cannot just say something like that. He documents
00:13:25something to it. He's lying, but with
00:13:29his own interpretation. Very much with this
00:13:33part. If there are even security arrangements,
00:13:36then it seems it didn't happen. If it was
00:13:40for the Strait of Hormuz, then it becomes even more wrong. Why? Because there were two
00:13:43possibilities. Either we thought Oman would accept it if they
00:13:46came, which you yourself are saying. I don't assume that
00:13:50Oman would accept such a thing without America's permission. Or
00:13:54we thought Oman, which wouldn't accept it, would
00:13:57come and tell Bahrain to help Oman accept to sign an anti-American
00:14:01thing. This is really strange. And it didn't happen in reality. First,
00:14:05Bahrain said, "I'm not coming." The UAE said, "I'm not coming either." Saudi Arabia said,
00:14:08"Why did Ansarullah come there and do what? I'm not
00:14:12coming either." I just told you that we are not talking about you. Someone
00:14:16else has opponents. The first of them are the Americans
00:14:19themselves. My point
00:14:23is not that
00:14:25if this agreement, if this meeting were held, and if that
00:14:29agreement were announced, all the political, economic,
00:14:32and security arrangements of the region would be transformed.
00:14:36No, but a change would occur. It has been announced
00:14:40without that meeting. What's wrong with that? Didn't we sign with Trump?
00:14:43Pezeshkian was in Tehran, he was in Paris.
00:14:46I explained the reasons, I explained why, after all,
00:14:49this meeting, which I think
00:14:52if it were held, and the agreement were announced
00:14:55in this meeting, it would definitely be in our favor.
00:14:59That's my opinion. I have another question. I'll ask you this too. Now, I don't know what our time
00:15:03allows. You see, my question is
00:15:07that, like the very issue of the memorandum
00:15:09of understanding between us and America, where we said that if this
00:15:13memorandum of understanding had happened, it would have been good. Is
00:15:17there not a criticism that the reason
00:15:20for the failure of this Salalah
00:15:23meeting in Oman was that it wouldn't be held, just as it wasn't
00:15:27held? That is, if it were held, that is, you were fundamentally dealing
00:15:30with countries that wouldn't hold it.
00:15:34They haven't held it now either. Or if they do, they will shape
00:15:37that meeting in another way. That is, they won't yield to your game, at least in
00:15:41this current stage. We still have time to pass
00:15:45until we can bring the countries of the region into our game. Yes, I
00:15:49completely agree with this statement. That is, in any case, for
00:15:53this reason, I was very surprised
00:15:56in the past few days about how this meeting
00:16:00was going to be held and whether it would be held
00:16:03at all. Yes, I had serious doubts from this perspective that,
00:16:08after all, I knew that it had serious opponents. Besides, that's
00:16:12why I say, if it were held, it would be in our favor. That is,
00:16:15it would definitely be in our favor, and an agreement would come out of it. The Iran-Oman
00:16:19agreement. The fact that it hasn't
00:16:22been held and, after all, has serious opponents,
00:16:26this is an issue that I myself mentioned at the beginning of the program,
00:16:29that, after all, both the Americans are against it and the Emiratis are against it.
00:16:32The Emiratis made a very extensive lobby to prevent this agreement
00:16:36from being announced. Just as last
00:16:39time, after the
00:16:42conversation that the ruler of the UAE had with Trump,
00:16:46that threat against Oman was made, that if you make this agreement and
00:16:49if you do something outside of America's considerations, we will
00:16:53bomb you. Therefore, these are two issues. That is, two very
00:16:56separate issues, in my opinion, and
00:16:59after all, these must be analyzed separately.
00:17:02Nima, look, what is happening is
00:17:05that we,
00:17:07at least in our country, don't see the conditions as warlike. That is,
00:17:11if you look at history, in
00:17:14warlike conditions, things become a bit different.
00:17:16Most of these international orders that you see
00:17:20established, actually, not through agreement, but through war. They emerge
00:17:24from within war. And when there is
00:17:27war, this discussion I'm having is completely historical. First,
00:17:31that order is established. One person completely dominates,
00:17:35and then everyone accepts it and signs.
00:17:38So that from that date onwards, that order
00:17:41is not enforced by gun, but by a contract that other
00:17:45countries also have a percentage of interest in. It should be established,
00:17:48it shouldn't be by gun. It has a difference with a gun. As long as it's by
00:17:52gun, the one who established that order by gun gives nothing
00:17:56to others. He gives a small percentage.
00:17:59The gun itself becomes easier, and they also get something.
00:18:03This is how it is. Look, what was happening was that we had
00:18:20The case is this: you wrote something that is good, but the problem is that
00:18:24it doesn't work. Which agreement? The MOU
00:18:27itself.
00:18:30No, no, I'm giving them an example. That
00:18:34some senior officials talk about it every day.
00:18:42It was just that. Suppose I'm saying a hypothetical
00:18:45issue, so that based on this assumption, we have an analysis. Suppose
00:18:49this didn't happen. The Omanis came and signed with us. Do you
00:18:53think America would have stopped putting pressure on the southern corridor from tomorrow?
00:18:56No. That is, still no. First, the order
00:19:00must be established, then you go and sign.
00:19:04The order is not fully established. The one
00:19:07who should give in in the middle are the Americans,
00:19:10the Emiratis, Bahrain, which had been cursing
00:19:14us since yesterday afternoon. Finally, these need to be sorted out,
00:19:17and they need to get off this devil's horse they are riding.
00:19:20Then you can sign something
00:19:24with them. Why was there a possibility of signing?
00:19:27I really thought it would be signed, unlike you. I think they will hold
00:19:30the meeting and it will be signed, and they will bring down 110
00:19:34dollar oil to 70 and 80 again. Then
00:19:38it won't work. Exactly the game that you saw happened
00:19:42with the MOU. That bad economic situation came down,
00:19:45but no special change happened. Mr. Khazab came here and
00:19:49counted several times on this wall for several people,
00:19:53that they didn't give you your money. The issue of the axis
00:19:56of resistance in the region, our allies,
00:19:59has not been resolved. I don't know, they didn't accept the Iranian order
00:20:03in the Strait of Hormuz. None of these events, none of them. Yesterday,
00:20:06Mr. Kharatian also brought up something interesting. Mr. Irvani
00:20:10even wrote a letter to the United Nations, listing
00:20:13the violations.
00:20:15I think the problem is this: we need to take
00:20:19an approach, a look at history. The post-war international
00:20:23orders are like this:
00:20:26first, it is established, then they make an exchange
00:20:29for putting down their guns. They sign something together. First,
00:20:33the winner and loser are determined. And there, it is in that
00:20:37situation where tension is high, it is to the detriment of the enemy. Let's not do anything that
00:20:40can allow them to win. I said this is strategic and tactical. Look,
00:20:44after all, this order has pillars.
00:20:47I'm not saying that if that agreement
00:20:50in Hormuz happens, all these pillars will be established. No, Hormuz is one
00:20:54of these pillars. I say it has been done. What do we have to do with
00:20:57gathering everyone to sign together?
00:21:00Who has a problem? Well, there's also an atmosphere, Mr. Najafi. That is, for example, when something
00:21:04happens, for example, we talk about the Emiratis
00:21:07like this. That is, it's not just
00:21:11one agreement. There's a specific discussion related to that
00:21:14event, which is not there, and then there's a lot of
00:21:17peripheral issues. So when we, with the UAE,
00:21:21to use Mr. Nima's words, fought against us, meaning a fighter
00:21:25is the only country that openly, with Mirage aircraft,
00:21:28only they have it, came and bombed
00:21:31you with the flag of the UAE. It's very
00:21:34important. Look, there should be no unfairness. We didn't
00:21:37hit the UAE. You see a picture, for example, we laid
00:21:41down two missiles on the ground. We didn't do it.
00:21:44If we had, I wouldn't be sad. I would say they hit us, and they got hit. The UAE
00:21:48is not the same UAE as before. That is, the UAE that before the war constantly invited
00:21:52great powers and issued joint statements about the three islands. Well,
00:21:55these
00:21:58issues are actually the result of force. Yes,
00:22:00the result
00:22:02of, for example, but one point is also that these countries in the region
00:22:06are caught in a strange security
00:22:09dilemma. We agree. Do we really think that with the Oman
00:22:12meeting, Baghdad, Dubai, wherever, I don't care, it will be resolved?
00:22:15Does it even take shape?
00:22:19I don't want to. I want to know how that security dilemma,
00:22:22this statement from all of them, I want to know
00:22:25what effect this meeting has on that. Look,
00:22:29let me say it dramatically. When
00:22:32does it become right? When does this understanding with Oman work?
00:22:35We took time from the network. While thanking Khabar Network for broadcasting,
00:22:39we have time, I think 15 minutes, to bring the discussion to a conclusion. Now,
00:22:43you state your point. This bilateral understanding works. When all of them
00:22:46come and sit in Tehran, that's right. Well,
00:22:50then it's clear who the winner and loser are.
00:22:54What order is going to be established? Oman, I don't think
00:22:57even claims to determine the order of, for example, the Strait of
00:23:01Hormuz, the Persian Gulf, and the Sea. Anyway, Oman is one side of this issue,
00:23:05and we also need to bring Oman into
00:23:08the agenda and arrangements that we
00:23:11want. If
00:23:14I'm not mistaken, this has already happened. If we were able to reach
00:23:18an agreement with the Omanis regarding
00:23:22I said why America opposed it. Let me present a hypothesis.
00:23:26Yes, it might be a correct statement. It was in America's
00:23:29favor. So why did America oppose it? Why do I say America
00:23:32opposed it? The sign of America's opposition is that Bahrain,
00:23:36UAE, Saudi Arabia say, "We're not coming." This is a sign of America's opposition. But
00:23:40America is later. Ruhollah ضرب says that some are really
00:23:44like a donkey waiting for a sign. That is, if America points,
00:23:47it's over for some of these countries. Now, now, these small
00:23:51countries. Since we are not official authorities, we can speak
00:23:54freely. These people really killed our children. Let's not forget
00:23:58who we are talking about. But now, here,
00:24:02America still had an assumption that it was going to
00:24:05open the Strait of Hormuz agreement as well. Let's not forget that this very
00:24:09thing that was written and its clause is really good, we
00:24:13repeatedly said that this clause is a masterpiece. We also said
00:24:16this honestly. The fact that it said, "Well, so be it," means the Strait of
00:24:20Hormuz will open with my arrangements. It didn't happen again.
00:24:24Yes, now again, the assumption was that the Oman
00:24:27meeting was based on what? The opening of the Strait
00:24:31of Hormuz. Therefore, up to this point. Otherwise, did you
00:24:34think Busaidi, for example, said, "Don't tell Trump. Let's hold a meeting
00:24:38and invite others"? Before he even answered
00:24:41Mr. Araghchi's call, he would call Trump and ask, "May I
00:24:45answer their calls or not?" Seriously, what I'm saying is not a joke.
00:24:49It's the reality of the diplomatic scene of this country. Well, for
00:24:52Iran and for America, as
00:24:55I told you, the issue is fundamentally strategic.
00:24:58That is, no, they thought the Strait of Hormuz would open, and then they saw Iranian
00:25:02officials give very good interviews. Even Mr. Araghchi also said in an interview that, no, this
00:25:06agreement that has been signed is not an opening. After this
00:25:09interview, everything, all positions changed.
00:25:12Suddenly, that is, in their understanding, I'm not saying
00:25:16they were promised something. No, no, their
00:25:20understanding was that, "Well, here too, the Strait of Hormuz will also open through this middle
00:25:23corridor." Then they saw no, it won't open. Suddenly, they backed
00:25:27out. Bahrain said, "I'm not in." Yes, I will now tell you that analysis regarding Yemen
00:25:31and all that. You said, "Perhaps the Saudis wanted Iran
00:25:35to put pressure on the Yemen front to allow this strait." Yes, I think
00:25:39it's one of, because this coincided exactly with this meeting and the issue
00:25:42of Yemen and the hitting of that east-west pipeline
00:25:45of Saudi Arabia. In my opinion, this can be one of the hypotheses
00:25:49that the Saudis put pressure. This is separate from that
00:25:52American issue and the Americans' opposition, that
00:25:56the Saudis intend to, in any
00:26:00case, by delaying this issue and creating disruption
00:26:03in the Iran-Oman agreement,
00:26:06gain a concession from Iran in the
00:26:09Yemen domain. That is, I think this is one of the cases that the Saudis
00:26:13will probably pursue. Well,
00:26:16if you agree, let's move on to the NPT discussion as well.
00:26:19We have two positions, the sweet NPT discussion. Yes, let's
00:26:23have the NPT discussion too. I wanted to tell you
00:26:26that yes, I don't know, Mr.
00:26:30Dr. Baghaei also had a position. I had put it there. If friends
00:26:33also put
00:26:36this, I think it's not bad, because
00:26:40now, given the recent meeting that was held
00:26:43by the Board of Governors, well, friends, please put this part
00:26:47of Mr. Dr. Baghaei's speech, the respected spokesman of the Ministry.
00:26:49Yes,
00:26:58this is from Mr. Baghaei's recent interview, press conference, and other things, part of the contradiction
00:27:02and
00:27:06audacity of the opposing sides. From one
00:27:10On their own behalf, they are doing something that questions the
00:27:14existential
00:27:16philosophy of the NPT regime,
00:27:18and
00:27:21on the other hand, they complain that why do countries fundamentally
00:27:24talk about deterrence-related
00:27:27and nuclear issues?
00:27:30The
00:27:33primary reason for such discussions
00:27:37are those who are rendering the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty ineffective
00:27:40in all its parts.
00:27:43The NPT has three
00:27:47fundamental principles: nuclear disarmament, prevention
00:27:50of the proliferation of nuclear weapons,
00:27:54and the part that is very important to us is the peaceful
00:27:58use of nuclear energy. Well, neither in the field of disarmament,
00:28:05the spread of nuclear weapons, nor in
00:28:07connection with non-proliferation have they been successful. They allowed
00:28:11their friends to have
00:28:14nuclear weapons, including the Zionist regime, and regarding
00:28:17the benefit of countries, including developing countries, from
00:28:21nuclear energy, see how they obstruct.
00:28:24They have used every tool, especially in relation to
00:28:27the Islamic Republic of Iran.
00:28:29Therefore,
00:28:32self-restraint is not a solution for us. Well, the policy of the system
00:28:36is clear. Surely, as a country with
00:28:40a civil society, our parliamentary
00:28:43representatives discuss various issues.
00:28:46We cannot prevent
00:28:49dialogue and debate
00:28:53on various issues that relate to the country's national security.
00:28:56Let's not forget that Iran is the only
00:29:00country whose nuclear facilities have been attacked several
00:29:03times over the past year and a half. Let's not
00:29:07forget that our nuclear scientists have been assassinated. Over
00:29:10these few decades, sabotage has occurred
00:29:13in Iran's nuclear facilities under circumstances where all
00:29:17these nuclear facilities were under the supervision of the agency, and Iran has been fully committed
00:29:21to its safeguards
00:29:23obligations under the NPT.
00:29:26Therefore,
00:29:28in such a context and environment,
00:29:31it is not
00:29:35strange for
00:29:39those who have a position in media
00:29:42and political discussions
00:29:46to talk about these issues, I don't think
00:29:49it's strange.
00:29:51Well, Dr. Mohsen Rezaei also has a stance, Major General
00:29:55Mohsen Rezaei also has one. Let's also consider the stance he took on his
00:29:59X page in English. Friends should also have that. It was about the NPT. That is also
00:30:02important, in my opinion. The
00:30:06anti-Iranian resolution adopted by the Board of Governors is illegal, technically
00:30:10unfounded, completely political, and unacceptable, and clearly bears
00:30:12the fingerprint of American
00:30:16and Zionist pressures. The political and destructive actions
00:30:19of the International Atomic Energy Agency will push countries towards
00:30:22withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty or NPT.
00:30:26Mr. Najafi, do these statements
00:30:30we are seeing from officials indicate
00:30:32a serious will within the country?
00:30:36Before we even get into how you analyze it, should we or shouldn't we,
00:30:39how far should we go
00:30:52the country's nuclear issue, now these stances that our officials have taken
00:30:56regarding the NPT issue.